Rule-Governed vs. Contingency-Shaped Behavior: When to Teach by Instruction and When to Shape by Consequences
If you’ve ever told a client, “Do this and you’ll get that,” only to watch them struggle—or wondered why some behaviors stick after direct practice but seem fragile when you only give instructions—you’ve encountered one of the most practical distinctions in ABA. The difference between rule-governed and contingency-shaped behavior shapes how we teach, troubleshoot, and support lasting change.
This post is for BCBAs, RBTs, supervisors, and clinically informed caregivers who work with learners across ages and ability levels. You’ll learn what separates these two types of behavioral control, why it matters, and how to choose (or blend) strategies based on safety, task complexity, and your learner’s needs.
One-Paragraph Summary
Rule-governed behavior is controlled by verbal or written instructions that describe what will happen if you act a certain way—no direct experience needed. Contingency-shaped behavior is learned through trial and error; the learner experiences consequences firsthand and adjusts based on what actually happens. The key difference: rules can produce fast change but may persist even when circumstances change, while contingency-shaped behavior flexes with real-world feedback. In practice, rules shine for safety and speed, while shaping excels at building flexible, accurate skills. Both matter, and the most effective teaching often blends them.
Clear Explanation of Rule-Governed and Contingency-Shaped Behavior
What Is Rule-Governed Behavior?
Rule-governed behavior happens when someone acts because a verbal or written statement told them what would happen. A student raises their hand because the teacher said, “If you raise your hand, I’ll call on you.” An employee wears safety goggles because the posted sign says so. The person follows the rule without needing to experience the outcome firsthand.
The strength of a rule is speed. You don’t have to burn yourself to learn not to touch a hot stove if someone tells you it will hurt. Rules let learners avoid dangerous trial and error and benefit from someone else’s experience.
But rules have a catch: they can outlive their usefulness. If the teacher leaves the classroom or stops calling on hand-raisers, the student might keep raising their hand anyway because the original rule is still running in the background. Once a rule takes hold, it doesn’t automatically update when the world changes.
What Is Contingency-Shaped Behavior?
Contingency-shaped behavior emerges from direct contact with consequences. A child touches a stove, gets burned, and learns to avoid it. A cook tastes their dish, finds it underseasoned, adds salt, tastes again, and adjusts until it’s right. Learning happens through repeated feedback and adjustment.
This kind of learning is slower at first. It takes trials, mistakes, and consequences to refine the behavior. But once it’s shaped, the person stays sensitive to outcomes. If the consequences change, the behavior changes too. The cook adjusts seasoning in real time. The child notices if the stove is no longer hot and re-evaluates their avoidance.
The Role of Verbal Behavior and Rules
Verbal behavior—the ability to speak, understand language, and follow instructions—is what makes rule-governed control possible. A caregiver, teacher, therapist, or even a sign delivers a rule through words. That rule then travels through the verbal community: a parent tells a child, who tells a friend, who adjusts their behavior without ever experiencing the outcome directly.
Rules work because humans can relate language to outcomes without touching them. We don’t need to experience every consequence to act on a rule. This is powerful for safety and efficiency. It’s also why teaching verbal skills early is so important—a child who understands words can access rules that protect and guide them.
The catch is that rules only work if the learner understands the language and the rule-giver is credible. A rule whispered in a language the learner doesn’t speak is just noise. A rule from someone who has been wrong before may not carry much weight.
Key Distinctions: How Behavior Is Acquired and How It Changes
Acquisition method: Rules can produce behavior change almost immediately—no practice needed. Contingency-shaped learning takes time and repeated trials.
Sensitivity to change: Once you follow a rule, you often keep following it even if the stated consequence disappears. Contingency-shaped behavior shifts quickly when consequences shift because the learner is directly monitoring the outcome.
Performance precision: Early rule-following may be quick but rough. Contingency-shaped behavior tends to fine-tune over time because feedback constantly shapes small adjustments. A student told the rules of basketball can start playing right away, but a player who’s learned through thousands of shots adjusts their form based on whether the ball goes in.
Generalization: Rules can transfer to new situations if the learner understands they apply. “If you raise your hand to ask a question, the teacher will listen” might generalize to different classrooms if the learner sees the pattern. Contingency-shaped behavior may be more tied to the specific setting where it was learned, though it can generalize if similar contingencies exist.
Why This Matters in Clinical and Educational Practice
Understanding the difference between these two types of control solves real problems. When you know whether behavior is rule-governed or contingency-shaped, you can choose better teaching strategies and troubleshoot noncompliance more effectively.
Suppose you’ve given a client clear instructions on how to greet a peer—a rule-based approach. But the client doesn’t use the greeting in their natural environment. The rule might be too abstract, the client’s verbal skills might not match the rule’s complexity, or the social consequences in the real world don’t match what you promised. Knowing that rules and contingencies can mismatch helps you spot the problem and adjust.
Or imagine a child learning to ride a bike. You can give all the rules you want (“Keep your eyes forward, pedal smoothly, balance by leaning slightly”), but the child will only truly master it through falling, adjusting, and feeling the balance shift. Rules get the learner started; contingency-shaped learning makes them smooth.
The practical payoff: you can choose the right tool for the job and avoid over-relying on rules when kids need direct practice, or trying to shape complex skills when a clear instruction would save time.
Key Features and Defining Characteristics
Rule-Governed Behavior
Rule-governed behavior has three hallmarks. First, it appears because of a verbal statement about a contingency, not because the person has practiced and been reinforced. Second, it can emerge without the person ever experiencing the promised consequence. Third, once established, it often persists even if the consequence disappears or changes.
In ABA, we recognize different functional types of rules. Pliance is following a rule because the rule-giver said so, and you want the social approval or want to avoid the disapproval that comes with rule-following. Tracking is following a rule because you believe the consequence described actually exists in the environment—you follow the rule because reality backs it up. Augmenting is a rule that changes how much you care about a consequence; for example, “If you eat your vegetables, you’ll be strong” might make you value being strong more, which then motivates vegetable-eating.
Contingency-Shaped Behavior
Contingency-shaped behavior has equally clear markers. The behavior emerged because the person experienced consequences directly—reinforcement or punishment that followed their action. The learning took shape gradually through repeated contact with those consequences. And because the behavior is tied to actual outcomes the person monitors, it changes readily when the consequences change.
Think of a child learning to operate a new toy. No instruction needed—they press, twist, and tap. Some actions get rewarded with a sound or light; others don’t. Over trials, the effective actions become more frequent. If the toy’s mechanism breaks and a button no longer works, the child notices and stops pressing it. The behavior is flexibly tied to the current reality.
When You Would Use This in Practice
Reach for Rules When Safety or Immediate Compliance Is Critical
If a child is about to run into traffic, you don’t wait for them to experience consequences. You use a clear, direct rule: “Stop at the curb.” You want immediate behavior change, and safety is too important to depend on trial and error.
Rules also make sense when direct experience is impractical or unethical. You teach fire evacuation procedures by rule and rehearsal, not by starting a real fire. You teach a client not to take someone else’s belongings by rule, not by letting them steal and experiencing the fallout.
Clear, accurate rules work best when the person understands language, the rule is specific and concrete, and the rule-giver is trusted. “Stay on the mat” is more effective than “Be safe.” And rules delivered by someone the learner respects land harder than rules whispered by a stranger.
Reach for Contingency-Shaped Teaching When Performance Needs to Be Flexible or Precise
Complex motor skills, social skills, and adaptive problem-solving benefit from shaping because the learner needs to feel and adjust based on real feedback. Teach a child to tie shoelaces using shaping: initially reinforce any attempt to cross the laces, then only closer approximations, then the full knot. The feedback from each trial guides the next.
Similarly, teaching a learner to read social cues—noticing when a peer is bored or interested—works better through direct interaction and natural feedback than through rules. “When someone yawns, they might be tired” is a helpful rule, but the learner will internalize it better if they practice in real conversations and see how people actually respond.
Combine Both for the Strongest Outcomes
The real-world gold standard is blending strategies. Give a clear rule to launch the behavior quickly, then arrange contingencies to refine and maintain it. Teach a classroom routine with a rule (“Line up at the door when the bell rings”), then reinforce the children who line up smoothly. The rule gets rapid compliance; the reinforcement keeps it strong over time and in different rooms.
This approach respects both the power of instruction and the power of direct experience. It’s efficient and humane.
Examples in Applied Behavior Analysis
Example 1: Teaching Hand-Raising via Rule
A teacher tells a student, “If you raise your hand, I will call on you and listen to your answer.” The student, who has not previously been reinforced for raising their hand, immediately begins raising it during class. The rule created the behavior without any prior history of direct reinforcement.
Why this works as a rule-governed example: The behavior appeared because of a verbal statement about a contingency. The student didn’t need to raise their hand dozens of times and be called on to learn—the instruction did the work.
Example 2: Shaping Toy Play via Contingency
A therapist works with a child who has not yet engaged in symbolic or complex play. Initially, the therapist reinforces any contact with a toy block—even picking it up or touching it. Over sessions, reinforcement is delivered only for more specific actions: holding the block longer, placing it near another block, stacking blocks. Eventually, the child builds towers and engages in multi-step play sequences.
Why this works as a contingency-shaped example: The play behavior emerged gradually through direct contact with reinforcement for successive approximations. The child shaped their own behavior through feedback, trial, and adjustment—not through instruction.
Examples Outside of Applied Behavior Analysis
Example 1: Workplace Safety Signs and Rule Compliance
A factory posts a sign: “Wear safety goggles when operating this machine.” Employees wear goggles because of the rule, not because they’ve experienced an eye injury on that specific machine. The rule controls the behavior directly.
This is rule-governed behavior: a verbal/written statement influences action without requiring personal contact with the consequence.
Example 2: Learning to Cook by Tasting and Adjusting
A cook follows a recipe initially (“Add two teaspoons of salt”), but as they prepare a dish, they taste it, adjust the seasoning, taste again, and adjust again until the flavor is right. The initial rule gives a starting point, but direct sensory feedback shapes the final product.
This is contingency-shaped behavior: repeated direct experience with a consequence (taste) refines the behavior (salt amount) flexibly and precisely.
Common Mistakes and Misconceptions
Mistake 1: Assuming Every Instruction Functions as a Rule
Not all instructions create rule-governed control. If you tell a learner something they don’t understand, in language that’s too complex, or from a source they don’t trust, the instruction doesn’t function as a rule. A BCBA might say to a junior therapist, “Use augmenting operations to increase motivation.” If the therapist has never heard the term and doesn’t know what it means, the instruction isn’t functioning as a rule that controls behavior.
A rule only works if it lands. The person must understand the words, believe the rule-giver, and grasp the relationship between the behavior and the consequence.
Mistake 2: Believing Rule-Governed Behavior Is Always Superior
Some learners and professionals trust instruction and think direct practice is slow or wasteful. But many complex, real-world skills simply can’t be learned from words alone. You cannot learn to ride a bike, play an instrument, or manage social anxiety purely by following rules. You need the feedback of the body, the environment, and actual social interaction. Rules support learning, but they don’t replace the need for practice and direct experience in many domains.
Mistake 3: Confusing Prompts with Rules
A prompt is a temporary cue that helps a learner produce the correct behavior right now. A rule is an ongoing verbal description of a contingency. You might physically prompt a child to wash their hands (a temporary support), but you also teach the rule “Wash your hands before eating” (an ongoing instruction). Prompts fade as independence grows; rules may persist. They serve different functions, and mixing them up can lead to weak teaching plans.
Mistake 4: Ignoring That Rules Can Become Barriers
Once a rule is established, it can be hard to change—even when the world has changed. A client learned years ago that “You must ask permission before speaking in group,” and they follow that rule rigidly, even in a therapeutic setting where speaking up is encouraged. The old rule now blocks progress. Recognizing when a rule has become counterproductive is crucial.
Ethical Considerations
Working with rules and contingencies carries ethical weight. A rule has power because someone accepts it, and that acceptance deserves respect.
Transparency and truthfulness matter. Never knowingly deliver a false rule. If you tell a client, “If you finish your work, you can have a break,” then you must deliver the break. If the rule doesn’t match reality, trust erodes and rule-following breaks down. More importantly, it’s dishonest.
Consent and autonomy are foundational. Whenever possible, explain the rule and the contingency. Let the learner know why the rule exists. For clients with limited capacity, seek assent—their willingness to participate—even if a guardian provides legal consent. Issuing rules in a coercive tone, without explanation, without respect for the person’s role in the decision, undermines dignity.
Use the least intrusive approach. If a learner can be guided by a gentle rule rather than heavy-handed reinforcement withdrawal, prefer the rule. If a learner can benefit from direct, positive feedback rather than punishment, choose that. Rules and contingencies are tools, not weapons.
Monitor for unintended harm. Sometimes a rule that made sense when it was issued stops fitting. A safety rule that worked for a younger child may feel infantilizing to an adolescent. A contingency that reinforced independence may have inadvertently discouraged help-seeking. Regularly check in with learners and adjust.
Practice Questions
Question 1
A BCBA tells a client, “If you say ‘excuse me’ when you interrupt, people will respond kindly.” The client begins saying “excuse me” during interruptions without any prior reinforcement history for that phrase. Which type of behavioral control is most likely present?
Correct Answer: Rule-governed behavior.
Why: The behavior (saying “excuse me”) was initiated by a verbal statement describing a contingency. The client didn’t need prior trials or direct reinforcement history to start the behavior; the rule launched it.
Why other answers would be wrong: Contingency-shaped behavior would require the client to have interrupted, observed people’s responses, and gradually adjusted over time.
Question 2
A child learns to ride a bike by falling multiple times, adjusting their balance on each attempt, until they achieve stable two-wheeled riding without support. This learning is best described as:
Correct Answer: Contingency-shaped behavior.
Why: The behavior emerged through direct contact with consequences (the feeling of balance, the feedback from falling, the reinforcement of staying upright) over repeated trials. The child didn’t rely on a rule like “Keep your head forward and lean slightly”; they learned through interaction with the environment.
Why other answers would be wrong: Rule-governed behavior would imply that an instruction caused the change.
Question 3
An instructor gives a long, complex conditional instruction using abstract language: “If antecedents in the environment are congruent with established discriminative stimulus functions, then emit the operant response in accordance with established response topography.” The learner fails to follow the instruction. What is the best explanation?
Correct Answer: The rule lacked specificity and did not match the learner’s verbal repertoire.
Why: Rules must be understandable to the person receiving them. Abstract, jargon-heavy language creates a rule that doesn’t function, no matter how accurate the content is. The learner’s comprehension level determines whether an instruction works as a rule.
Why other answers would be wrong: Saying “contingencies are absent” ignores the real problem—instruction clarity. Saying “the learner is unmotivated” misses the comprehension issue. A rule that isn’t understood can’t control behavior, regardless of motivation.
Question 4
A parent tells their child, “Don’t touch the stove—it’s hot and it will burn you.” Later, when no adult is present, the child touches the stove and experiences a burn. After this, the child avoids the stove. What does this example illustrate?
Correct Answer: The rule alone did not guarantee avoidance; direct contact with the actual consequence shaped a more robust avoidance behavior.
Why: The initial rule may not have been credible, relevant, or strongly established. The direct experience—the burn—created a more powerful, contingency-shaped avoidance tied to the actual consequence. This shows why some behaviors benefit from direct experience even when a rule exists.
Why other answers would be wrong: The point is that the rule and the direct consequence led to different strengths of learning. The direct consequence often shapes behavior more durably than a rule alone.
Question 5
Which teaching plan best balances speed of initial learning and long-term maintenance and transfer for a new classroom routine?
Correct Answer: Provide a clear rule for the expected behavior, then arrange contingencies to reinforce and shape performance over time.
Why: Rules produce rapid compliance without requiring repeated practice. Contingencies maintain the behavior, refine it, and make it flexible across settings. Together, they leverage the strengths of both approaches.
Why other answers would be wrong: Using only rules risks fragile, rigid behavior that doesn’t adapt. Using only contingencies may be slower and less efficient for initial safety-critical compliance. Combining them is typically the strongest approach.
Frequently Asked Questions
How can I tell if a behavior is rule-governed or contingency-shaped?
Look at the learning history. Did the behavior appear after an instruction, without prior practice? That suggests a rule. Did behavior gradually improve through repeated trials and feedback? That suggests contingency-shaping. You can also test by changing the contingency: if behavior persists despite the change, it may be rule-governed; if behavior shifts quickly, it’s likely contingency-shaped.
Are rules always less flexible than contingency-shaped behavior?
Not necessarily. A learner who understands a rule and believes it can follow it flexibly across new situations. “Raise your hand to ask a question” can be generalized to many classrooms if the learner grasps the principle. Contingency-shaped behavior can also be inflexible if the person has learned only in one narrow context. Both can be flexible or rigid; the difference is what drives the flexibility.
When should I avoid using rules?
Avoid rules when they are inaccurate or likely to mislead the learner. Be cautious if the learner’s comprehension level doesn’t match the rule’s language complexity. Skip rules if the rule describes a contingency that is likely to change soon, because the learner may keep following an outdated rule. And avoid rules if direct experience is essential to mastery—you can’t learn to swim by instruction alone.
Can rules and contingency-shaped methods be combined effectively?
Yes, and it’s often the best practice. A teacher gives a clear rule about classroom behavior, then reinforces students who follow it. A therapist explains a social skill, then role-plays and provides feedback on performance. Rules prime the behavior; contingencies refine and maintain it. Combining both approaches is more efficient and produces more durable learning.
What if a client follows a harmful rule given by someone else?
Assess whether the rule-giver is credible and whether the rule is being reinforced by the client’s community. Then teach the client to evaluate rules: help them identify the stated contingency, test whether it’s true, and compare the rule to their own experience. Arrange safer contingencies in your clinical setting where the client can learn different responses. Protect the client’s safety while building their capacity to make informed choices about which rules to follow.
How do I teach a learner to test rules instead of following them blindly?
Start with simple, low-stakes rules. Ask the learner, “What does this rule say will happen?” Then help them design a small experiment to check: “Let’s see if that’s true.” Reinforce accurate observations and adaptive adjustments. Teach them the three-term contingency (antecedent, behavior, consequence) so they can recognize these elements in rules they encounter. Over time, learners can develop a healthy skepticism about rules and a capacity to evaluate whether they still work.
Key Takeaways
Rule-governed behavior and contingency-shaped behavior are two pathways to behavior change. Rules deliver speed and leverage wisdom without requiring the learner to experience danger or inefficiency. Contingency-shaping builds flexibility, precision, and lasting sensitivity to outcomes. Both exist in every clinical and educational setting. The most effective practitioners know when to rely on clear instruction and when to arrange consequences for direct learning—and often do both at once. Understanding this distinction makes you a more thoughtful, responsive clinician who can match the intervention to the learner and the goal.
